Bush's speech

Me not smart... me enrolled into telecom at the peak... graduated in a market that didn't have jobs for me...

Me like skiing backwards too... =)
 
We were talking federal spending, which the administration does control. I know it's not the same thing as economy as a whole, so I guess I misspoke.
 
I don't think so. I was talking about the parts which the government can control, the spending, revenue, etc. What does the GDP consist of? I'm pretty sure it has more to do with how well businesses are doing in trade and production and stuff. The government can influence that part to an extent, but I don't think I was talking about that. I haven't taken econ yet, so I just have very basic knowledge of it.
 
I'm praying that somebody asks "Being that Bush's new plan has stated that our militaristic support is NOT open ended, Why are we building permanent bases in Iraq?"
 
I've read a few posts in this thread and numerous times read people saying that most iraqis want the US there, appreciate their presence, etc. In reality, over 70% of Iraqis feel that their lives will be greatly improved once the American presence is removed. I don't know if they're right, but that's what they really think. Enough unsupported bullshit, that's a legit number. Source: http://politicaligor.wordpress.com/2006/11/22/70-of-iraqis-favor-us-withdrawal/

the above is a repost of the original article so if that site is biased or something don't bother pointing it out; they didn't write the article.

Oh, 70% is also the rough unemployment rate of Iraq right now. Great place to live after the bombs dropped.
 
The debt is huge, i'll grant you that. However, considering that the surpluses at the end of clinton's term were hundreds of billions of dollars a year, that's hardly a drop in the ocean. More like a drop in a shot glass. While it's undeniable that much of this was due to the booming economy, the basic principle is the same. The less money we spend, and the more we take in, the more the debt is decreased. The debt could feasibly be paid off if americans sacked up, stopped cutting taxes and stopped wasting hundreds of billions of dollars needlessly. Bush has cut taxes and increased spending drastically. If we continue reducing taxes, the debt will never be payed off through any amount of market cycles.

I'd also like to add that bush cut taxes in the least effective way possible. Had his tax cuts been aimed at working class and poor americans, that money would have been spent immediately and fueled the economy directly. Instead, by giving billions to the richest americans, much of the money is being invested overseas etc. Money trickles up, not down.
 
With federal spending, you also have to take into account the current market conditions. In the Clinton era, they could afford to spend money because there were many foreign investors pumping money into the US because of the booming market. Who wouldn't in their right mind spend money if it's flowing freely? As for the surplus, it's hard to spend it all when you have a red hot market... I mean look at VA Linux: It rose almost 700% on it's first day? That's unheard of anywhere in history.

In Bush's presidency, he inherited a country who's market was already failing. Now if he did cut taxes and wage a war, there's a pretty good reason for doing it. It's not WMDs or the hunt for terrorists, it's all political and economical.
 
While he did cut taxes last year, the first time he did it was actually a fallacy. He told people that they were getting tax cuts, decreasing the amount of $ withheld from each paycheck, and then at the end of the year, people got less money back; a fake tax cut. It worked, but it was a lie. That's what bothers me about his tax cuts.
 
It really is interesting how these threads seem to follow a formula. Same old shit, different event to provoke it. I've pretty much removed myself from the news and current events the least several months. With that, its shocking (actually, not really) that I took pretty much nothing away from this thread. Hell, I didn't (and still haven't) watched Bush speech. Maybe I'll step back into it when the State of the Union address rolls around.
 
You forgot to take into account that the US debt also encompasses more than just the National debt. I agree that if every american were to buckle up and pay off their debts, it would theoretically be possible, but alas, it's already too late. The only realistic way to get rid of a debt is to increase interest rates to a point where borrowing money is too much for anybody to afford. Of course, increasing interest rates would absolutely kill the economy and put the US into a market depression. The Feds haven't increased interest rates simply because they want the US to remain prosperous. Too many people live outside their means and that's what's killing everybody.

BTW, some of those overseas interests are owned by the US. The entire market is stupidly complicated, of which I know very little of. However, I have traded in the markets and studied a bit of it for a few years. I also know that human nature is nearly impossible to change. It's not terribly hard to change one person's spending habits if you talk to them, but try changing 300 million people. They'll think you're nuts.
 
Oh yah, why keep the US economy afloat? Consider this quote:

"I expect by '07 there will be a significant decline in U.S. consumer spending, and I don't see what will take its place, because it's so important as the motor of the world economy."

-George Soros

If the US isn't buying Chinese produced goods, what will happen to the China's market? There is no other country in the world that spends as much as the US does. That's why it's so utterly important to keep the US economy alive, by any means possible.

Here's something on the side: I can guarantee that if the US economy falls, ski companies like K2 and Line will fall as well. There won't be anybody else to buy their product! Now that's a scary thought... of course, this is beside the point.
 
Bush want's Iraq because he wants to invade Iran. I believe there are reports of the administration already discussing that. They won't admit to it, but why else would they invade Iraq?

You may ask why Iran? One reason: Oil

The US consumes 20 million barrels of crude each and every day. They currently produce only 10 million barrels every day, the rest are imported. Now oil isn't exactly cheap at those quantities, so if the US were to say control Iran, they would have control of the 4 million barrels they produce everyday.
 
Dude, I'm totally with you on like everything. After Saddam attacked us on 9/11, we had to invade him and his friends in Afghanistan. Taking Saddam out of power and having a US presence totally stabilized the country, and the world is thankful for what we've done. If we didnt attack, Iran would have teamed up with Iraq, Afghanistan and North Korea and dirty bombed us. Bush is doing the right thing by keeping our troops there fighting the remnants of Saddam's regime, and committing more troops will keep this conflict from becoming another Vietnam. Its a good thing we got Afghanistan first too, because according to Pentagon sources, they were building a Navy fleet to attack Dubai and stuff. Rock on, keep preachin' that truth!
 
Did you know that Saddam once held the key to Detroit? He was given the key after he donated a quarter million to a Church there. That's not small coin by any means, especially in 1979. Saddam was a friend of the United States at one point...

Also, the US funded Afghanistan's (and Osama's) fight against the Russians when they tried to invade Afghanistan. The United States gave the Afghans weapons...

Just something to chew on.
 
All LIES! You DEMONcrats with you're lying lier faces. The US would never give a known terrorist the key to Detroit, you're crazy. Besides, Saddam is Muslim, and Muslims dont believe in God, so why would he donate money to a church?!?!
 
This was shortly after Saddam came into presidency. I don't think the US has a crystal ball that tells them what was going to happen in the future. And it's money... a quarter million in 1979.
 
I was going to leave it at that but

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA

BAHAHAHAHAA

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

HAAHAHAHAAHHHAAHA

HAHAHAHAHaBAHAHABAHBABAHAhAHAHAhA

god I dont know what to say

I am actually really really angry right now

I have to go punch a bag or something. havent been this surprised by something on a forum in a while...
 
^dude, everyone get's involved. france helped us. england helped us. germany helped us even though they are chickens. (nothing against germans)

did i miss anything important in this forum from last night till now?
 
New Zealand was in Korea, Vietnam and Germany

good thing we grew some balls and aren't in some country fighting for people who think Saddam attacked on 9/11
 
wAy2sTeEzY4u*

4008 Posts

No Life

Jan 10 2007

10:24:56

Quote Reply Quoting rosemariekait...* from Jan 10 2007 10:23:03:

yeah we need to completely ignore the middle east's problems. we don't understand them and they don't understand us so lets just stay away from their crazy relgious lifestyle

call me stupid, but i really think this war is a fucking jokeexactly, the taliban HATES us so if were going to be having a conflict in the middle east it should be with them, iraq doesnt pose as much of a terrorist threat to us.

802

we are fighting the taliban..there just isn't anything to report about it...and terrorists are terrorists they all hate us so it really doesn't matter which ones we go after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top